My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00158
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00158
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:46:02 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:32:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
12/12/1973
Description
Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />anything in my experience with this board that we have worked harder <br />on and accomplished less than we have in trying to get the United <br />States representative in these negotiations to consider the rights <br />of the people in the Colorado River Basin. Our only hope is to get <br />the kind of relief that S. 774 will provide adopted by the Congress. <br />Mr. Brownell now takes the posit~on that he has accomplished his <br />task and that he really has no place ~n the legislation. The admin- <br />istration, particularly the Office of Management and Budget, is <br />bitterly opposed to the expendit~re of federal funds for salinity <br />control in the Upper Bas~n. At the same time, the EPA is demanding <br />that we do something about it. This is the kind of situation that <br />we find ourselves in. <br /> <br />We have heard rumors to the effect that they are not even going to <br />put this matter before the Senate and House Interior Committees, but <br />would just have line items in the State Department budget to pay for <br />all of these things. If they do, we are going to have to be even <br />more vigilant and alert. If it does come before the Interior Com- <br />mittees, then we have some good representation on those committees <br />and the Committee can consider S. 774 along with the request for <br />.funding of the desalination plant and the lining of the Coachella <br />Canal. But if they are in different bills, it makes it much more <br />difficult to keep control of them. <br /> <br />If you maintain a salinity level on a nondegradation policy, it is a <br />non-use policy. In addition to what Larry has pointed out, it means <br />that the projects which we have on the board which have been autho- <br />rized, some of them which are under construction, like the Fryingpan, <br />the others, will increase salinity just because they reduce the <br />quantity of water. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Ray, this Minute, isn't that a treaty that is <br />required to be approved? <br /> <br />Mr. Moses: They are very cagey about that. I think the Minute modi- <br />fies the treaty. I can't read it any other way. They say, no', it <br />isn't. It is the kind of thing that the treaty anticipates that <br />minor adjustments can be made by the representatives of the two <br />countries without requiring Senate approval. And it all goes back <br />to the whole problem of the increased grasp of the executive branch <br />for power and the quiescent and passive manner in which the Congress <br />has accepted these things. Just like the impoundment of funds, that <br />hurts us as badly. I think it is illegal. I think it is immoral. <br />It is all part of the same trend that has gone on not just under the <br />Nixon administration, but for several administrations. The executive <br />branch is assum~ng more and more power and the legislative branch is <br /> <br />-12- <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.